Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 20:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Justifying how many hours of work with this poop?
SOURCE: http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9130
CCP Gnauton wrote: So without further ado, here's what we've changed this time around. These changes are already in on Singularity, and will hit TQ in March.
A note to begin with: we've come up with a standardized global scheme for Meta Level 1-4 modules, so by looking at the name you should be able to tell at a glance where the item falls in the Meta pecking order. It goes like this:
Meta Level 1: Upgraded
Meta Level 2: Limited
Meta Level 3: Experimental
Meta Level 4: Prototype
This will, in due time, be applied to every Meta level 1-4 module in the game, and except where otherwise noted, has been applied to all module groups mentioned in the list below.
So you have replaced numbers 1-4 with names. o.k. No improvement in market searchability. Problem not solved wherein meta 1-4 are not always progressively "better" than the tier below it. Confusion not remedied. What did we gain? Save the Miners! |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 20:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Gnauton wrote: Skill Hardwiring
All Skill Hardwiring implants in the game have had their names changed to conform to this format:
[Corporation][Implant Group Name][Skill/Function Name][Two-Letter Flavor Acronym]-[Slot Number][Percentage Bonus]
As an example, the Hardwiring - Inherent Implants 'Lancer' G0.5-Betaimplant, which fits in implant slot 7 and gives a 2% bonus to the Controlled Bursts skill, has now become the Inherent Implants 'Lancer' Controlled Bursts CB-702 implant. Hardwiring - Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' HY-2.5, which goes in implant slot 6 and gives an 18% bonus to Warp Speed, is now Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' Warp Drive Speed WS-618.
Let's put this in a better comparative format:
OLD: Hardwiring - Inherent Implants 'Lancer' G0.5-Beta NEW: Inherent Implants 'Lancer' Controlled Bursts CB-702
So new players will automatically know that 702 means slot 7 and 2% bonus. Yea, I see that. And they'll also know what "controlled burst" means? And of course Controlled burst is easier to memorize and type into a search box than 'lancer' G. O.K....
OLD: Hardwiring - Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' HY-2.5 NEW: Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' Warp Drive Speed WS-618
This one is better, but again, new players will still have to be taught about the numbers at the end, so it's not like we're adding anything intuitive. I suppose once they learn, they won't have to click "show info" to see the % boost stat, once they learn to read it. Is that what we're accomplishing here?
AND!!!
Let's look at some examples you DID NOT list that I get from this SOURCE: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Module_changes
OLD: Hardwiring - Inherent Implants 'Noble' ZET300 NEW: Inherent Implants 'Noble' Mechanic MC-803
hm... pictures the mechanic from Serenity...
OLD: Hardwiring - Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' DY-0.5 NEW: Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' Fuel Conservation FC-802
Fuel Conservation? We going green? Does this save me jump fuel? Where do I gas up my ship, I don't want to run out of fuel mid-fight!!?! My point is that a new player isn't going to know what the skill does, so if you're simplifying implants by showing what skill they modify, not sure that's making them more new-player friendly.
OLD: Hardwiring - Zainou 'Snapshot' ZMT1000 NEW: Zainou 'Snapshot' Torpedoes TD-603
Ok, so this boosts torpedoes... How? Faster, longer flight time, more damage, tighter explosion radius, less effect of target velocity on damage reduction, launcher ( or array ) rof bonus? Really? I mean, sure they can learn what it means, but they could learn it before.
WTF??!?! Save the Miners! |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 20:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Gnauton wrote: Armor Coating/Armor Hardener/Armor Plating Energized/Shield Resistance Amplifier/Shield Hardener
Every module that boosts either armor or shield resistance has gone under the knife. In addition to adapting them to the global Meta 1-4 scheme, we've replaced the words "Reflective," "Reactive" and "Magnetic" with the modules' relevant damage types (EM, Explosive and Kinetic, respectively).
Wait a minute. You just assigned arbitrary names ( which by the way makes it HARDER to search for the right missile ) for damage types for missiles. But apparently Trauma is a fckload eaiser to learn than Magnetic? What the hell? Really?
But wait, there are still arbitrary things about your new names. Why no examples here?
OLD: Explosion Dampening Amplifier I NEW: Explosive Deflection Amplifier I
OLD: Heat Dissipation Amplifier I NEW: Thermic Dissipation Amplifier I
OLD: Kinetic Deflection Amplifier I NEW: Kinetic Deflection Amplifier I
OLD : Magnetic Scattering Amplifier I NEW: EM Ward Amplifier I
So... Explosion was too freakin complicated, and Explosive is better. Heat is so much more confusion than thermic.. I agree... Kinetic we left alone because we already pissed off the missile-chuckers... and EM is better than magnetic...
BUT Dampening won't do we had to change that to deflection, but we can't OBVIOUSLY couldn't deflect heat... sorry thermic energy... so we had to leave that one different as dissipation, and Since everyone knows that EM energy can't be deflected, dampened, or dissipated, we went with WARD, because noone knows wtf scattering means anyway... in fact I'm not sure that's even a word... I'm sure now that we have the ability to localize the client defence will become defense in the us, because noone's smart enough to make that leap either...
c'mon ccp, what the crap?
Save the Miners! |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 20:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Gnauton wrote: Assault Launcher/Heavy Assault Launcher/Standard Missile Launcher/Siege Launcher
This is perhaps the most extensive and potentially controversial change we've made in this iteration, because it goes beyond individual modules and all the way into module (and market) groups.
Please make sure you disseminate this information among your corporation and alliance mates as widely as possible.
We have changed the missile launcher names as follows:
Heavy Assault Missile Launchers have become Assault Missile Launchers
Assault Missile Launchers have become Light Missile Arrays
Standard Missile Launchers have become Light Missile Launchers
Siege Launchers have become Torpedo Launchers
The general idea here was to change the name of each launcher into something more generally descriptive of its function and the type of ammo it is able to fit, and more specifically to erase the counterintuitive assault launcher/heavy assault launcher dichotomy that's caused its fair share of confusion in the past.
I'd have to say this would be the LEAST controversial of the changes I've seen. Missile types included in the names of the launchers? That's a good idea. Is it necessary? meh, I don't think so, but at least it makes sense. The fact you think this is the most controversial is.... fck I don't even have the right word for this.
Save the Miners! |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 20:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Scripts
CCP Gnauton wrote: All scripts in the game have had the word "script" added to their names, so a simple market search for "script" will now bring up all scripts available in the game, irrespective of market group.
For a comprehensive list of every item name change made so far, please point your browsers to this EVElopedia page. This central name change portal will be updated as and when more module names get changed, and we will split it up and make it prettier in future iterations. Note that in places where the New Name column is blank, the module's name has not been changed.
right because searching for script is a lot easier than clicking on the ammo - scripts in the market tree. I like this concept, but you applied to to the group that needed it the least. holy cow.
Save the Miners! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5223
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 20:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
Clicking the GÇ£commentsGÇ¥ link is hard, I take it? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 20:59:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Clicking the GÇ£commentsGÇ¥ link is hard, I take it?
Yea, I think they need to name it something else, I dunno what it means.... Perhaps something simpler like [ linkage to textual feedback mechanism ] ....
srsly I'm hoping for a lively and general discussion on the topic. Save the Miners! |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
418
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 21:00:00 -
[8] - Quote
As for the meta items......meh....doesn't matter either way. They're not descriptive either using meta 4 or prototype when talking about something unless the person you're talking to already knows what it means. It just makes it a PITA with the change since there's a bit of learning the new scheme.
As for the implants.....it's an improvement in that you'll know 702 refers to slot 7 and 2% bonus. "Controlled burst" still doesn't mean anything to me. And as usual, I replace implants so infrequently, that I generally have to look them all up to find the info on the new set I want anyway. So, this change, is more or less pointless save for the "702". Still going to have to pull the info on it to find out exactly what the bonus applies to, won't we?
CCP would be wise to sort implants based on what they affect rather than what slot they fit in. Obviously, when searching for new implants I'm looking for function, NOT WHAT SLOT THEY GO IN. And so, as usual, you have to look at all of them to make sure you're not missing something. We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5223
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 21:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ris Dnalor wrote:srsly I'm hoping for a lively and general discussion on the topic. So go to the comments thread, where that is already happening and where this feedback belongs.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 21:19:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Ris Dnalor wrote:srsly I'm hoping for a lively and general discussion on the topic. So go to the comments thread, where that is already happening and where this feedback belongs.
Maybe I want to discuss it with folks that haven't read the dev blog as well? Is that so terri-badly wrong? Maybe it'll cause someone to go read the dev blog and subsquently add more feedback to the thread of which you speak?
Or maybe I'll only get responses like yours. Either way, there is no harm done. Save the Miners! |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
5223
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 21:22:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ris Dnalor wrote:Maybe I want to discuss it with folks that haven't read the dev blog as well? Sure doesn't seem like it. Looking at the posts, it rather looks like you want to provide feedback to CCP about their design decisionGǪ you know, kind of what you'd do in a feedback thread where they might actually read it.
Quote:Or maybe I'll only get responses like yours. Either way, there is no harm done. It clogs up the forums with pointless and misplaced posts. Oh well, IBTL.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3368
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 21:27:00 -
[12] - Quote
... you so totally missed the train.
We already argued this point on the feedback and got a concession from the devs they need to go back to the white board for the module names and truama.
Bottom line what you just did was totally wasted effort.
|
Bischopt
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
82
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 22:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Personally I think changing module names was and is something useless that's just going to confuse people.
Still, not the worst thing CCP has done. |
AureoBroker
Natural Inventions Solyaris Chtonium
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 22:40:00 -
[14] - Quote
The names are identical to the skills which give the same bonuses. Stop being ********, they make perfect sense. |
Tarsus Zateki
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 22:59:00 -
[15] - Quote
Are you really so dimwitted that you can't learn a new naming scheme? Will CCP have to create a new tutorial module to teach you what the new names signify? Perhaps a simple voice analyzer implemented in game so that you can slur, "i want dos really gud misil thingies," in your barely literate monkey babble and the game will automatically point you to a meta level four launcher.
Eve is one of the few MMOs on the market that doesn't actively pander to the idiocy of the general public; I'm sure if you try really, really hard you'll get over this. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
773
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 23:06:00 -
[16] - Quote
Dear op, you sir are an idiot. Please read the dev blog again and then read the comments section.
there is over 25 pages of feed back there and several CCP posts.
After you are done with that please press Ctrl + D to your ships. |
Xurr
Angelic Insurrection Corp
15
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 23:56:00 -
[17] - Quote
It seems like if they can't play with their barbies they'll find a new way to **** away time.
Yes I know there is an official post. Yes I posted there. |
Schmacos tryne
Norsk Testosteron
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 00:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
I support this thread as I haven't read any dev blog and I don't intend to. Feedback to CCP is as useless as a condom machine in the vatican.
I totally agree on the M1-4 icon improvement and mostly agree on the rest. |
EnslaverOfMinmatar
BRAPELILLE MACRO BOT MINERS
14
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 00:20:00 -
[19] - Quote
Remember we used to get offers to buy Nvidia videocards in the mail from CCP? CCP is mimicking Nvidia that's why they rebrand everything instead of creating new content. Every EVE player must read this http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=29-01-07 or uninstall and DIAF |
Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
248
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 00:26:00 -
[20] - Quote
Perhaps I should have put a TL:DR
I'll go back and add one.
But here it is.
Quote:TL;DR -- Some changes goodish, some changes badish, but some changes make less sense than the original names!?!?
How's that possible?!?
So, my real desire is to understand -- honestly -- how the specificly pointed-out changes in the pages above came about, and in what way could they have been considered a good thing?
Maybe I am an idiot, and it's obvious -- but I'm not seeing it, and noone's given me any answers to my admittedly sarcastic questions. Maybe I'll get answers, maybe not. But if I did not ask, I certainly would not have.
So, hate me if you must, think me stupid if you like. I realize my delivery is less sugar and more vinegar but hey, whoo-pee-doo!
We'll see.
Fly well out there kiddies, and srsly don't bash the Ris, because you might hurted his feelings -- and that might make the purple dinosaur cry.
Don't take me so seriously, -- it could very well be that I'm not seeing the point when so many others do. It happens *shrug* but i'd like to know what it is. Save the Miners! |
|
Vyl Vit
Cambio Enterprises
316
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 02:04:00 -
[21] - Quote
Schmacos tryne wrote:I support this thread as I haven't read any dev blog and I don't intend to. Feedback to CCP is as useless as a condom machine in the vatican. What makes you think THAT wouldn't be used?
Anyone with any sense has already left town. |
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
1855
|
Posted - 2012.03.05 16:23:00 -
[22] - Quote
We created a specific comment thread for the blog where this was announced and that's where Gnauton and friends will go for feedback and discussions. Please keep the feedback in that thread. Thank you. CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 :: [one page] |